From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Mar 22 17:37:47 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id RAA19239
          for current-outgoing; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 17:37:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA19225
          for <current@FreeBSD.org>; Fri, 22 Mar 1996 17:37:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id MAA01156; Sat, 23 Mar 1996 12:29:49 +1100
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 12:29:49 +1100
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199603230129.MAA01156@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: bde@zeta.org.au, terry@lambert.org
Subject: Re: PATCH: small, syntax changes for devfs
Cc: current@FreeBSD.org, julian@ref.tfs.com, phk@critter.tfs.com,
        scrappy@ki.net
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>> I prefer a flat namespace.

>Why?

- it's easier to search.
- existing programs depend on it.
- it forces you to choose short unambiguous names in a consistent way.
  This is most important for tty names.

I think a layered namespace would need to have zillions of links to
a flat namespace to avoid these problems.

Bruce